Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages • Hacker News Board

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#71

Post by berkes » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:02 PM UTC

jwlake wrote: post #52

I'm unclear why ubuntu needs the chromium package in apt. Seems like they should just stop publishing apt packages for chromium, only publish in snap, and steer users into using snap for installs and not apt. Seems less confusing and wins or loses on its merit.

On latest LTS (Ubuntu 20.04 LTS) the apt version is simply a transitional package. It installs the snap for you.

It says so on the description directly next to the name: "Transitional package - chromium-browser -> chromium snap"

There only for people upgrading, so they are not suddenly surprised seeing their browser gone.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#72

Post by bityard » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:02 PM UTC

jefft255 wrote: post #23

I wonder if it is finally time for me to give Arch a try. It's a shame that all my lab's machines run Ubuntu; although I find it solid, this sort of controlling behavior by Canonical seems against the spirit of FOSS.

You might like Linux Mint or Pop OS, both of which are re-spins of Ubuntu without snaps.

Or for that matter, regular old Debian probably has 99% of what you need.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#73

Post by mixmastamyk » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:04 PM UTC

It's interesting in that I quite like the idea of snap packages, just not their implementation. I recently purged snaps from my Ubuntu Mate machines after a few years of use because of the realization of only using two:

1. The micro terminal editor.

2. Chromium, because it was forced.

Well, #1 was packaged for 20.04 so I didn't need it any longer. That left Chromium. For that single package, I had to tolerate my system being spammed all over:

- Multiple irrelevant loopbacks cluttering my mounts list

- Dedicated folders in filesystem: /snap ~/snap

- Very slow startup, for chromium.

- Lots of disk space taken

- An always running daemon! (Wasn't it root too? Can't remember). apt doesn't need a daemon.

Sheesh! That's not even mentioning the store issues which others have described already.

Sorry, but a few newer packages here and there are not worth all that. I'll handle it myself, thanks. What snap does isn't actually that hard. I'd keep it around if it wasn't so obnoxious at putting itself in front and center of everything.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#74

Post by bityard » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:04 PM UTC

rocky1138 wrote: post #19

ColanR wrote: post #5

I've been putting off my next OS reinstallation, but I think I'll be moving away from Ubuntu and over to Mint this time.

Pop!_OS is another choice to consider. Apparently they are sticking with Ubuntu but are stripping the Snap stuff before pushing any updates.

Most notably, Pop OS (I'm doing the damn silly punctuation) takes all of the stuff that Ubuntu has made snap-only and builds them as debs. So it's basically Ubuntu de-snapified.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#75

Post by michaelmrose » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

kd913 wrote: post #12

The reason for why the backend for the snap store hasn't been opensourced has been explained multiple times. Namely that it would be expensive to open source it with little benefit in return. Canonical already spent a large amount of investment opensourcing launchpad and nobody other than them operate it. Mainly because the majority of the costs are for operating an instance which most other distros aren't willing to…

Nearly every packaging system is able to successfully divorce building of software from offering artifacts for download let alone ops. This is arguing that having failed to design their system appropriately we ought to accept the fruits of that bad design instead of dumping Ubuntu. Compare this with apt.

Second what you describe as a defect. There being multiple sources of software is a plus it means the power is in the hands of the user to decide whom to trust. What you don't want is a situation where people must configure additional sources just to have commonly needed software. The example you provide about the Java PPA is apt, pun intended, ideally commonly required software would be provided by the vendor instead of siloed in a third party source. Of course the vendor and the license must make this possible.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#76

Post by 6AA4FD » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

bhhaskin wrote: post #29

jefft255 wrote: post #23

I wonder if it is finally time for me to give Arch a try. It's a shame that all my lab's machines run Ubuntu; although I find it solid, this sort of controlling behavior by Canonical seems against the spirit of FOSS.

I am honestly thinking the same thing. Still a bit hesitant as I mainly use Linux for work.

I would try fedora or centos. They have good stability and documentation. In my admittedly limited experience centos has worked better for me than debian or ubuntu.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#77

Post by the_af » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

jefft255 wrote: post #23

I wonder if it is finally time for me to give Arch a try. It's a shame that all my lab's machines run Ubuntu; although I find it solid, this sort of controlling behavior by Canonical seems against the spirit of FOSS.

Aren't you changing more than just snaps by changing the distro? It seems the philosophy of Arch is different to a Debian based linux.

Can't you simply opt out of using snaps and keep using .deb with Ubuntu, no matter what Canonical is pushing as their preferred distribution?

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#78

Post by zentiggr » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #60

entropicdrifter wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you need this kind of packaging but want to retain freedom, just use an alternative solution like flatpak, which sandboxes from the get-go and lets you control what parts of your system the application can access

> just use an alternative solution like flatpak Saying " just use an alternative" seems overly dismissive of the complications that entails. IIUC, the only options for that are (a) abandon Ubuntu, or (b) actively circumvent Ubuntu's software distribution infrastructure, reminiscent of dealing with Windows 10 forced updates. IMHO this somewhat erodes Ubuntu's value proposition.

I have a laptop that I'm planning on rebuilding from a failed NTFS/Win10 system to Linux something.

Now I know it's not going to be Ubuntu or anything else derived from Canonical.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#79

Post by lbruder » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

jefft255 wrote: post #23

I wonder if it is finally time for me to give Arch a try. It's a shame that all my lab's machines run Ubuntu; although I find it solid, this sort of controlling behavior by Canonical seems against the spirit of FOSS.

Try Manjaro. It's based on Arch, but with a little more stable software, think Debian Testing instead of Sid. Simpler to install and works like a charm.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#80

Post by commoner » Wed, Jul 08, 2020, 6:06 PM UTC

red_admiral wrote: post #61

psanford wrote: post #7

From the linked announcement: https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906 > Applications in this store cannot be patched, or pinned. You can’t audit them, hold them, modify them or even point snap to a different store. You’ve as much empowerment with this as if you were using proprietary software, i.e. none. This is in effect similar to a commercial proprietary solution, but with two major differences: It runs as root, and it…

I wonder how hard it would be, in theory, to write an open-source "cracked" version of snap that lets you do these things.

The Snap server is closed source, so this would require building an open source Snap server as well. At this point, it would be much simpler to use Flatpak or some other solution.